DoomYoshi wrote:Why can't some cannons have one target and some cannons have 2?

They can. As long as one does not become too powerful over the others, they can all have different abilities.

Is there a way to code it so that the cannons with two targets can only bombard one target per round?that would allow some cannons to have two target but reduce the power.It would have to be <a bombards either b or c> not <a bombards b and c>.because in real time they would have had to turn the cannons to attack another spot which would have taken time.

DoomYoshi wrote:Why can't some cannons have one target and some cannons have 2?

They can. As long as one does not become too powerful over the others, they can all have different abilities.

Is there a way to code it so that the cannons with two targets can only bombard one target per round?that would allow some cannons to have two target but reduce the power.It would have to be <a bombards either b or c> not <a bombards b and c>.because in real time they would have had to turn the cannons to attack another spot which would have taken time.

Don't trust me on this, because I know very little about xml, but I don't think that's possible.

Lessened the glows by 1 pix and lessened opacityRemoved ladder shadowschanged men shadows and moved cannon shadows a littleMoved all of the names below the highlights (The ones in the folder were above)removed black spot from black territoryremoved white spot from upper legendchanged color of the dark purple targetsremoved some shadowing from both legendsrealigned items in bottom legendchanged and darkened impassible river in the legendfixed some walls at the doorwaysAdded grayish highlight to Remember the Alamofixed shadow at center wall where it bulged outmoved territory borders in Cos area

Click image to enlarge.

Waiting on Doom Yoshi for more input on game playShould Duque only have one target on it?Will keep checking graphicsRemember the Alamo needs moved to the right more input on graphics please

Elimininating the Gonzalez target makes sense from a gameplay sense, but also creates something really weird.It means that the cannons outside are more useful than the cannons inside. A weird attackers adavantage. I guess it would make sense if we assume that since the building stays put, and the attacking troops keep moving, the offensive cannons can have greater accuracy? Right now there are 4 cannons inside and 5 outside. Is that the correct proportion?

gh, men are getting better but keep working on them or start looking for an alternative way to show them. When I said to get rid of the shadows for the ladders, I meant the shadow that was inside the alamo as it did not fit with the rest. Just rub that bit out.

Font=DualityI will return the ladder shadow and fix itThe men, I will keep looking

I did this as a quick mock draft, do you think either a flag or a profile pic would look better or should I continue with some kind of figure?In a better version of course I would size every thing and have only the flags with no background. I could even do that with the profile pictures too. I don't know what would look better if the profile pics had backgrounds or not. Any ways what do you think about either of these?

gh, some ideas to try and bring this away from rorkes drift.Think about using conditional borders some. Hold a Mexican general to be able to get into the Alamo and hold an American general to attack out.Allow the cannons to bombard a complete region, this would get rid of the targets all together but a higher neutral needs to be placed onto them. Hold a complete region to be able to use the ladders/bridges going into and out of the Alamo.

The men might be the way to go, but another idea might also to use rank insignia as well. Give each territ a rank and think of a bonus to go with that rank. General with 2 privates +1, with two sergeants +2, with 3 officers+4. You could then have a unifying colour for both American and Mexican armies ground. I am sure the site would not mind if you used their insignia so players will recognize the ranks really easily.

koontz1973 wrote:gh, some ideas to try and bring this away from rorkes drift.

o man, I was thinking about having an 150 yard line.

koontz1973 wrote:Think about using conditional borders some. Hold a Mexican general to be able to get into the Alamo and hold an American general to attack out.Allow the cannons to bombard a complete region, this would get rid of the targets all together but a higher neutral needs to be placed onto them. Hold a complete region to be able to use the ladders/bridges going into and out of the Alamo.

The men might be the way to go, but another idea might also to use rank insignia as well. Give each territ a rank and think of a bonus to go with that rank. General with 2 privates +1, with two sergeants +2, with 3 officers+4. You could then have a unifying colour for both American and Mexican armies ground. I am sure the site would not mind if you used their insignia so players will recognize the ranks really easily.

As always Koontz great suggestions. I will definitely implement these into the map. I have been checking around to see if I can find something better for the men. I will keep looking.

need to move hold 5 officers to winneed to move chapel, hospital and convent yard in legendAre the targets good to show what region the cannons shoot at or should it be something different?forgot to move highlights in legend to the name; chapel, hospital and convent yard.

GH, going to get you pissed at me, but I think these will help you towards the GP stamp later on.

You have too many ranks now. Generals can stay at four stars, troops 3,2,1 stars, but turn all of the other troops that have different ranks into 1 or 2 stars only. This is for clarity.Remove all targets for the cannons. You do not need them now. Use the coloured glow you have going round the cannons inside the complete region it can attack. You have a lot of symbols and on a map like this one, they are not needed. I think the ladders need to be two way now. With the new conditions of getting in and out of the Alamo, some new ways need to be added so you do not get bottlenecks. Cannons are very powerful, raise them to ten neutrals I would think.

koontz1973 wrote:GH, going to get you pissed at me, but I think these will help you towards the GP stamp later on.

You have too many ranks now. Generals can stay at four stars, troops 3,2,1 stars, but turn all of the other troops that have different ranks into 1 or 2 stars only. This is for clarity.Remove all targets for the cannons. You do not need them now. Use the coloured glow you have going round the cannons inside the complete region it can attack. You have a lot of symbols and on a map like this one, they are not needed. I think the ladders need to be two way now. With the new conditions of getting in and out of the Alamo, some new ways need to be added so you do not get bottlenecks. Cannons are very powerful, raise them to ten neutrals I would think.

Santa Anna looks very nice now.

GH...i have ben watching this deveopment, and knew it was popular...i had started something in 3D towards it, but glad someone else got to do it as i wanted to concentrate on my current MaP.i agree with koontz about there being too many stars, but i don't agree about removing the targets...keeping target symbols are almost standard indication for cannon-fodder....perhaps they would look better made smaller however.I also disagree about colour glow for the target areas...they are unnecessary if you keep the target symbols.Also consider as you draw...if this is the large version (as i haven't read thru previous pages) about keeping the detail of the humans on the small - space is required to make them decent.Yes ladders need some direction indicators as do the "bridges" i think they are (i.e. Bell to Prez)i like the style and sure you'll do well with this.

Last edited by cairnswk on Sat Dec 01, 2012 2:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

cairns wrote:GH...i have ben watching this deveopment, and knew it was popular...i had started something in 3D towards it, but glad someone else got to do it as i wanted to concentrate on my current MaP.

Thank you for watching and commenting on this. I was wondering with all of your exp. how this would fair with you.

cairns wrote:i agree with koontz about there being too many stars,

yes sir

cairns wrote:i don't agree about removing the targets...keeping target symbols are almost standard indication for cannon-fodder....perhaps they would look better made smaller however.

note taken

cairns wrote:I also disagree about colour glow for the target areas...they are unnecessary if you keep the target symbols.

note taken

cairns wrote:Also consider as you draw...if this is the large version (as i haven't read thru previous pages) about keeping the detail of the humans on the small - space is required to make them decent.

This is the large version. I found that out with trying to shrink some of the other versions of officers that I had. They looked ok big but shrunk down they looked bad. I haven't tried a small version yet to see what they would look like.

cairns wrote:ladders need some direction indicators as do the "bridges" i think they are (i.e. Bell to Prez)i like the style and sure you'll do well with this.

You mean directional arrows on the map. If they are attack both ways I should still install them?

I definitely disagree about the ladders being two way....they should stay as one way attacks into the Alamo. When an army is attacking a fort, and puts up ladders against the wall, do the defenders start coming down the ladder to attack the attackers? No, the attackers come over the ladder into the fort. They give the Mexican Army an advantage over the Alamo defenders, which they should have, given how superior the Mexican force was compared to the Texian force.

I personally do not agree with making the cannons such a high neutral. Making them that high will make it pretty late in the game before they are even in use, while they should be an integral part of the attacking/defending force. I also think you should add the targets back onto the ladder territories, it makes a nice counterweight to the advantage that the ladders give to the Mexicans. It makes an easyish way to stop them coming over the walls.

Graphics...well, there are plenty of people commenting on that, and I don't really have much to add, so I'll stay silent on that issue.

I do have to ask how the bonuses work now. The bottom legend is a bit confusing, to me at least, as to how the bonuses work. Could you explain it to me?

Still looking good, gh. I'm glad to see you continuing to work on it, it will be a blast to get to play on this one day!

tkr4lf wrote:I definitely disagree about the ladders being two way....they should stay as one way attacks into the Alamo. When an army is attacking a fort, and puts up ladders against the wall, do the defenders start coming down the ladder to attack the attackers? No, the attackers come over the ladder into the fort. They give the Mexican Army an advantage over the Alamo defenders, which they should have, given how superior the Mexican force was compared to the Texian force.

That is a good point. I will post the ladders as attacking both ways this time and give the game play people a chance to look at it and then see about changing it back in the next version.

tkr4lf wrote:I personally do not agree with making the cannons such a high neutral. Making them that high will make it pretty late in the game before they are even in use, while they should be an integral part of the attacking/defending force. I also think you should add the targets back onto the ladder territories, it makes a nice counterweight to the advantage that the ladders give to the Mexicans. It makes an easyish way to stop them coming over the walls.

that is a good point. Maybe I will try five and see where that goes. The canons will be pretty powerful now since they can attack a whole region, but they are killer neutral. I will need some more opinions on where to set this at.

tkr4lf wrote:Graphics...well, there are plenty of people commenting on that, and I don't really have much to add, so I'll stay silent on that issue.

If you see something I know you will let me know

tkr4lf wrote:I do have to ask how the bonuses work now. The bottom legend is a bit confusing, to me at least, as to how the bonuses work. Could you explain it to me?

The next version will be a lot easier to understand

tkr4lf wrote:Still looking good, gh. I'm glad to see you continuing to work on it, it will be a blast to get to play on this one day!